Fix (not remove) Third Person Perspective

[shagohad 124]

Well out of curiousity I just downloaded the files for the Arma mod we're talking about and looked with a completely uneducated eye at the .sqf file inside. It's less than 200 lines of not very dense code (is that all that you need for this btw? Never did Arma modding myself).

 

Obviously 99% of the coding effort is in knowing how to start those 200 lines and then tweaking them whilst performing certain blood sacrifices and rituals, but now it's been done once, I'd imagine later efforts would be easier to replicate and expand on.

 

are we talking about a hacked A2 solution? or one that provides sginificant visual feedback ect.

 

honestly man, this is like a coke vs pipsi argument, i for one will be playing on a private hive 1st person server with a small comunity as soon as that is possibel and I will be loving it. I dont want other people to haev to play 3rd

 

everyone do what they want to do to have fun :)

[Rantanplan 18]

It works the same for all players, It is balanced.

But PvP is not everything, and the shown difference (=exploit) makes it difficult for the developer to balance the PvE game.

 

How do you balance the zombie thread so that a player has statistically the same likelihood to die from a zombie attack, disregarding whether he plays in 1st or 3rd person view???

 

The 1st person player always exposes himself when he peeks around corners, so he will get attacked by zombies much more often; currently the 3rd person player can avoid such situations much easier. So, to balance the PvE component of the game, for 3rd person mode the Zeds would need to be stronger or in much higher numbers, to pose the same threat as in 1st person mode.

Obviously that will never happen.

 

The only answer that we have today is by dividing the community - from a developer point of view not a nice option either...

Edited January 7, 2014 by Rantanplan

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

It's not my problem, it's a problem for developing and balancing the game in terms of the basic survival elements - loot, zombies, health degradation over time...

 

Vastly over dramatizing. 3rd person doesn't make such a big difference that they will have to balance differently for the two options. Really. Pick the one you like and play. End of discussion.

[Yummi 3]

4WP can be abused easier than 3PP can be abused.

[Max Planck 7174]

4WP can be abused easier than 3PP can be abused.

 

Why not explain how?

 

Vastly over dramatizing. 3rd person doesn't make such a big difference that they will have to balance differently for the two options. Really. Pick the one you like and play. End of discussion.

 

I sort of agree, if the two are to remain split off from each other, there is really no need to balance them against each other. They can be different in difficulty and it shouldn't bother anyone.

 

There are other things that could be problematic though, like the effect on vision from items like helmets and gasmasks.

I don't see how these effects could be implemented in 3rdP, and I worry that dev time will be taken away from this superfragilisticexpialidocious feature if it can't even be used in more than half the servers.

There might also be other planned features that wouldn't work when you are not seeing things from your guy's perspective, this is speculation though.

 

What I'm trying to say is, I hope development won't be split into two different 'branches', as that would probably hurt both.

Edited January 7, 2014 by Max Planck

[Merc13 11]

Honestly, it isn't like they added 3pv after the game was released-a mix of 3rd and 1st person cameras just adds to the strategies you need to consider in the game. If 1st person gameplay was half as polished as some AAA FPS games it wouldn't bother me that much, but as it is now it is too close and the mouse control is crap on top of it. Considering how clunky the 1st person view is combined with how few bullets it takes to die I think 3rd person view was wisely added to help balance things out. 

[Rantanplan 18]

...

I sort of agree, if the two are to remain split off from each other, there is really no need to balance them against each other. They can be different in difficulty and it shouldn't bother anyone.

...

But even then there may come a time when this may cause issues, e.g. when introducing global statistics - need to be divided as well.

And hopefully there will never be achievements to unlock something (as is the trend in many other games...)

[Yummi 3]

My idea of 4WP being abused:

 

You run around a corner and start receiving fire from some bushes in front of you. You turn around and hide behind the wall you just revealed yourself from and map out the bushes your shooter seems to be in. Looking over your shoulder in 4WP you know you cannot see any around this corner, so you back up and lean out only showing roughly 20% of these bushes and you look for something to suddenly appear (a gun, some feet, a backpack ect.), you lean in and out quickly to make sure no "weird branch" is flashing while looking over your shoulder as you character gains vision and looses vision of these bushes. Repeat until you find your enemy.

 

 

In this situation 4WP has a massive advantage making people in hiding suddenly appear and disappear within their surroundings. Yes you put yourself at a much larger risk than not looking around the corner at all but you will be able to find your enemy much faster and easier when it is literally flashing on your screen.

 

Just a thought.

 

Edit:

 

Idea for 4WP: Rather than having people appear on your screen when your character can see them, your vision should be heavily blurred with what your character cannot see. As you move/look around altering what your character can see, the vision becomes unblurry with what he can see.

Edited January 7, 2014 by Yummi

[tommes 331]

This kind of a system is always suggested for third person perspectives, and its just plain wrong.

 

You cannot have things be invisible one moment and suddenly pop into existence the next. Its a terrible system for new players to have to figure out, and it destroys any sense of immersion.

I agree that this solution is far from perfect but it is at least a solution large fractions of both camps could agree on until some better solution is found.

 

1st person definitely should be improved...though I don't see why so many take it for unplayable. It is very well playable. Head bob and post processing off helps a lot. Having better framerates would also improve the look and feel as well as better control over interacting with the world like climbing ladders and opening doors. Other than that Arma or DayZ 1PP is no other than other FPS games.

[tommes 331]

The devs made the game to be played a certain way...

The made the game obviously to be played in an uncertain way. Otherwise we wouldn't have this discussion.

[tommes 331]

If you want first person only. Wait for first person only servers and play game. I don't want to play this game on first person cuz i don't care about realism i prefer playing with 3rd person, its good in many ways when you use it. I like some realistic elements, but i hope they will not overstate that.

 

Remember this - This is still game not real life. You cannot want game to be 100% real. Many people still don't understand it.

Well, I'd like it then 99% or as much as possible. At least it should not be breaking common sense of combat as 3PP is right now. Checking rooftops and sniperspots with 3PP enabled is just futile. You can't use real world or even other FPS games knowledge and skills while others have practically drone vision.

[tommes 331]

Honestly, it isn't like they added 3pv after the game was released-a mix of 3rd and 1st person cameras just adds to the strategies you need to consider in the game. If 1st person gameplay was half as polished as some AAA FPS games it wouldn't bother me that much, but as it is now it is too close and the mouse control is crap on top of it. Considering how clunky the 1st person view is combined with how few bullets it takes to die I think 3rd person view was wisely added to help balance things out. 

The game is playable in 1PP. It is not half as broken as some people describe it here. It only feels that way if you're used to quasi superpowers like 3PP.

And I don't believe it was wisdom to put in 3PP but more like an easy way around some problems that 1PP only presents players who have not yet managed to master 1PP only.

Why 3PP ain't an elegant solution was very well summed up in that dyslexi video.

 

This whole discussion would make a major leap forward if we could agree on 3PP in the current implementation being not the best of all means to overcome the shortcomings in the presentation of 1PP in Arma and related games in the present state.

[hogscraper 328]

As mentioned in OP (and highlighted above once already):

It creates balance issues.

 

At this point, it really does seem that 3PP players just like the crutch of xray vision and are unwilling to even consider how it's lowering the quality of the experience for themselves.

 

As I also said in OP, disregarding pvp, imagine playing the best survival horror games/series of the last few decades (Amnesia, Dead Space, Resident Evil, Silent Hill imo) with a freecam that can see what's coming around every corner - Res Evil has a tightly bound shoulder cam (and used to have completely fixed cams at awkward angles looking at you from the corner of rooms etc), Alan Wake and Silent Hill have flashlight mechanics to restrict viewable areas. Amnesia had a restricted view, the sanity mechanic, darkness AND had invisible enemies just to put the willies up you.

 

Horror is about suspense and tension over the unknown. Remove the unknown and you remove the horror. This is supposed to be a survival HORROR game.

 

If the 3PP players want a diluted experience of what the devs intended, then sure they should keep arguing for the ability to see the unknowable. They should also ask for a warning before anything scary happens when they go to the cinema.

 

EDIT: Also honourable mentions to the Cradle and Ravenholme levels in Thief: Deadly Shadows and HL2 - these two highlight level and sound design rather than mechanics though, although both have very dark lighting affecting your vision, which most people running around Chernarus don't experience.

 

There are zero balance issues created playing the game EXACTLY as the devs have created it. YOU want to change the game into a 'diluted experience of what the devs intended' by limiting players' choices and then feel the need to water it down even more by 'balancing' the game to cater to your own self-imposed weaknesses. You chose to play only in 1pp and have crippled yourself. Instead of realizing the game is different from what you want it to be you seem completely willing to insult people who enjoy playing the game EXACTLY as the devs created and intended. Or are you suggesting that the devs intended for us to only use 1pp and are too stupid to know how to implement it?

 

To say I would get more from less when you can't possibly even begin to know what I look for in a game is obnoxious and narcissistic. Its the same argument people who play COD 'pro mod' use. They can't or don't want to deal with the game the way it was made so they act like people are just too stupid to realize how great their watered-down experience is. That's not pro, its handicapped and I don't want to play a game that forces everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Just because you can't handle the stress of knowing that at any second an unknown, unseen player might be watching you is your problem to deal with, not mine. 

 

Imagine playing any one of those games you mentioned where any of the npcs could near instantly kill you, with no defense possible, from angles or locations that you couldn't see, even with a free camera. That's right, you did imagine it, and realized it completely killed the entire argument you were trying to make so you added 'disregarding pvp'. What version of Dayz do you play where you can disregard pvp? If you can't then just delete that paragraph entirely. "This is supposed to be a SURVIVAL horror game". There, I fixed that for you. I can see where you might be confused as to why someone playing a SURVIVAL game would not want to lose a huge part of being able to survive if you think the game was meant to be horror first and survival second.

Edited January 7, 2014 by hogs

[Rantanplan 18]

There are zero balance issues created playing the game EXACTLY as the devs have created it. YOU want to change the game into a 'diluted experience of what the devs intended' ...

... playing the game EXACTLY as the devs created and intended. Or are you suggesting that the devs intended for us to only use 1pp and are too stupid to know how to implement it?

You realise that you are currenly playing an Alpha version of a game to be released in a distant future? The devs have given us an Alpha version and it is up to us to show them bugs/problems/weaknesses/...,  make suggestions for fixes/improvements/... They haven't even really started to balance the game, as they are still working on other issues that will have a significant impact on game balance, e.g. the number of Zombies.

 

Why it is the way it is right now?

I don't know your background, but I am playing with different evolutions of this game engine since 2001. The memories from back then are a bit shady, but I think the described issue has been present since day 1. It has been brought up many times over the years, but it has never been changed.

Why? I don't know. My guess would be, because the devs had other and more important things to do. With a community that was never big in PvP, the screaming may have never been loud enough to justify (significant) effort to address the issue.

But that does not mean that the devs have not seen that there may be an issue with the current implementation - but whether they will change it now, who knows...

[Publik 404]

I'd like to see 3rd person without a crosshair and without the zoom, making 3rd person unusable as a combat perspective.

[Mullucka 34]

I'd like to see 3rd person without a crosshair and without the zoom, making 3rd person unusable as a combat perspective

 

 

I don't know who would use 3rd person for combat, I play 3rd but always look down my sights in combat.

 

I'm a fan of the LOS rendering idea. I don't play 3rd person for any kind of advantage, I play it because I like it.

[floj 393]

My idea of 4WP being abused:

 

You run around a corner and start receiving fire from some bushes in front of you. You turn around and hide behind the wall you just revealed yourself from and map out the bushes your shooter seems to be in. Looking over your shoulder in 4WP you know you cannot see any around this corner, so you back up and lean out only showing roughly 20% of these bushes and you look for something to suddenly appear (a gun, some feet, a backpack ect.), you lean in and out quickly to make sure no "weird branch" is flashing while looking over your shoulder as you character gains vision and looses vision of these bushes. Repeat until you find your enemy.

 

 

In this situation 4WP has a massive advantage making people in hiding suddenly appear and disappear within their surroundings. Yes you put yourself at a much larger risk than not looking around the corner at all but you will be able to find your enemy much faster and easier when it is literally flashing on your screen.

 

Just a thought.

 

Edit:

 

Idea for 4WP: Rather than having people appear on your screen when your character can see them, your vision should be heavily blurred with what your character cannot see. As you move/look around altering what your character can see, the vision becomes unblurry with what he can see.

 

Watch the second 4WP link in OP, Outlawled has already implemented one method that this works at long range (>100m). In closer combat, you're still having to expose yourself to get that information. This enables the counter tactic of suppression fire by your opponent. Do you want to pop your head up with bullets pinging around your last known position?

 

There are zero balance issues created playing the game EXACTLY as the devs have created it. YOU want to change the game into a 'diluted experience of what the devs intended' by limiting players' choices and then feel the need to water it down even more by 'balancing' the game to cater to your own self-imposed weaknesses. You chose to play only in 1pp and have crippled yourself. Instead of realizing the game is different from what you want it to be you seem completely willing to insult people who enjoy playing the game EXACTLY as the devs created and intended. Or are you suggesting that the devs intended for us to only use 1pp and are too stupid to know how to implement it?

When the lead dev says that 3PP is broken and he wants to remove it (but won't because of the 3PP players) I think I'm on the right side of this argument. Also please tell me where I'm suggesting removing player choice... I'm removing an exploitable ability from one of the choices, not removing the choice. I'm not saying they're too stupid to implement it, this whole thread is about discussing ways to keep it as a part of the game design without changing the gameplay.

 

To say I would get more from less when you can't possibly even begin to know what I look for in a game is obnoxious and narcissistic. Its the same argument people who play COD 'pro mod' use. They can't or don't want to deal with the game the way it was made so they act like people are just too stupid to realize how great their watered-down experience is. That's not pro, its handicapped and I don't want to play a game that forces everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Just because you can't handle the stress of knowing that at any second an unknown, unseen player might be watching you is your problem to deal with, not mine. 

 

Imagine playing any one of those games you mentioned where any of the npcs could near instantly kill you, with no defense possible, from angles or locations that you couldn't see, even with a free camera. That's right, you did imagine it, and realized it completely killed the entire argument you were trying to make so you added 'disregarding pvp'. What version of Dayz do you play where you can disregard pvp? If you can't then just delete that paragraph entirely. "This is supposed to be a SURVIVAL horror game". There, I fixed that for you. I can see where you might be confused as to why someone playing a SURVIVAL game would not want to lose a huge part of being able to survive if you think the game was meant to be horror first and survival second.

I was talking about disregarding pvp for the purposes of the balance argument. The balance argument is in terms of pve aspects.

 

Since you're trying an ad-hominem with calling me narcissistic and obnoxious, I'll counter with saying that mentioning COD in a discussion about good game design is laughable. There's a reason that COD-kiddie is an insult for FPS players and if anything you're undermining your own argument. It's still entirely possible for players to be completely hidden in 1PP view or have you never heard of concealed sniping? What this would remove is the ability for bad snipers to take up bad observation positions and use an exploit to maintain their awareness without being exposed. It's entirely possible to keep a guy on lookout with a scope in a *good* hidden position and either take shots himself or just feed information to a squad nearby. It's entirely possible to be 99% concealed at closer ranges in 1PP - camoflage and remaining still are your friends, not using 100% concealment and a camera glitch for 360 degree awareness and pseudo-ESP.

 

But yeah if you want killstreaks, spawning with lotsa kewl guns and multiple nades lets go for continuing the COD gameplay aspects in this discussion. 3PP players pretty much have invisible UAVs hovering above them from spawn already so maybe the simplistic gameplay of COD is all that you aspire for in this game. Remind me why there's no 3PP competitive PVP shooters? Oh yeah because full awareness without risk devolves it into a camp-athon where turtling until the other player/team reveals himself is the only winning tactic, a game killing feature (for ranged pvp).

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

There are zero balance issues created playing the game EXACTLY as the devs have created it. YOU want to change the game into a 'diluted experience of what the devs intended' by limiting players' choices and then feel the need to water it down even more by 'balancing' the game to cater to your own self-imposed weaknesses. You chose to play only in 1pp and have crippled yourself. Instead of realizing the game is different from what you want it to be you seem completely willing to insult people who enjoy playing the game EXACTLY as the devs created and intended. Or are you suggesting that the devs intended for us to only use 1pp and are too stupid to know how to implement it?

 

https://twitter.com/Hicks_206/status/418847558702620672

 

Tweet from Hicks(developer) reads...

"Just finished an amazing 3 hour round of DayZ on a 3PP:OFF server. In my opinion, players using 3PP rob themselves of part of the experience"

 

They're not too stupid to know how to implement it. They're just too considerate and are letting you keep your magic parascope that you've grown so attached to.

[gamer222 86]

I don't see this thread at all for any discussion about camera view , saying that it should supposed to be fixed 3rd person is totally wrong this has nothing to do with people who like it or not it's built like that from 2001, only I see here in this thread insult to all ARMA Devs and hardcore players who enjoys their freedom of using different camera views...

[floj 393]

https://twitter.com/Hicks_206/status/418847558702620672

 

Tweet from Hicks(developer) reads...

"Just finished an amazing 3 hour round of DayZ on a 3PP:OFF server. In my opinion, players using 3PP rob themselves of part of the experience"

 

Added to OP with quote from Rocket.

[tommes 331]

"It's been there forever" is not a good argument. If it's bad it should be gone. No matter how long it's been there.

[tommes 331]

I'd like to see 3rd person without a crosshair and without the zoom, making 3rd person unusable as a combat perspective.

Removing crosshairs and zoom doesn't touch the issue with 3PP which is scoping out other players from places one shouldn't be able to.

[Ozar 108]

My opinion is that the third perspective should be removed totally out of the game.

 

Just that possibility to look around a corner or behind a wall without any risk is bad for the game i think.

 

If you want to see something you should take a risk. if you dont want to take this risk you cannot get a look. That would be nice for all players experience.

[Raventhorn 43]

I have been an advocate for removing 3pp since the begining of the mod.

 

But as already mention here many times, people get angry and frustrated when they are given a challenge and something is threatening their playstyle.

Even if the playstyle is bordeline cheating.

 

Not sure how much I want to elaborate on this (the last time I did, people started attacking on a personal level)

But I startet with painkillers as an example. You are hurt, and you shake... take a painkiller? Nah, just go 3rd person, problem solved. (save them until you have to shoot)

Having problems backing up in a car, might need a friend to guide you? Nah, just go 3rd person.

 

I have friends who are not able to fly a heli without 3rd person. Lazy? Or perhaps just un-willing to learn something new?

People seem to fear a challenge, everytime a game gets harder or require more practice people run for the hills. (or to be more accurate, get`s really angry)

I welcome a good challenge. I am hoping for heli settings as in take on helicopters on "realistic".

 

And here comes the fun part. Most people (even myself) prefer to play in 3rd person. I LOVE IT :)

But I am more than willing to part with it due to the obvious reasons mentioned several times (yes, OP has to repeat himself several times, and people still don`t get it)

 

But I love it for the wrong reasons, it makes my gameplay VERY easy. If I wanted a easy game there are several other options avaliable.

 

Best Regards.

[BL1P 252]

At the moment the compromise is as the op stated separate servers with soon to arrive separate hives.

This works well and both sides get to play in the play style they like.

 

As the op stated it fractures the community.

 

 

So if the community cannot live with the what I consider good compromise

 

The only other solution I can see working is a harsh one.

The devs and rocket in general prefer 1st person (from what i have seen) yes they say sometimes 3rd does have a reason to be in the game BUT in general its not suited for this style of hardcore survival game.

So the solution that would stop all arguments would be to remove 3rd totally.

Yes yes some would have motion sickness. To help reduce that amount they could remove motion blur and head bob and post process effects.

Alot of people who have played OFP, ArmA, ArmA2 and ArmA3 with me over the years have found that turning off those 3 settings will stop the motion sickness associated with first person 90% of the time.

 

Having people not LOS in first not appear in third but reappear in third when in LOS on first is not a solution and it will not work.

 

I doubt Rocket has the balls to remove third from DayZ so the compromise atm is a good choice.

If he does have them Ill be a happy man (hmmm does that sound a little broke mountain ?)

Edited January 8, 2014 by BL1P